Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/742

 THOMAS

678

THOMAS

complete release of all claims against him as chan- cellor had been given on his becoming archbishop, he was required to render an account of nearly all the moneys which had passed through his hands in his discharge of the office. Eventually a sum of nearly £30,000 was demanded of him. His fellow bishops, summoned by Henry to a council at Northampton, implored him to thi'ow himself unreservedly upon the king's mercy, but St. Thomas, instead of yielding, solemnly warned them and threatened them. Then, after celebrating Mass, he took his archiepiscopal cross into his own hand and presented himself thus in the royal council chamber. The king demanded that sentence should be passed upon him, but in the con- fusion and discussion which ensued the saint with uplifted cross made his way out through the mob of angry courtiers. He fled away secretly that night (130ct., 1164), sailed in disguise fiom Sandwich (2 Nov.), and, after being cordially wel- r med by Louis VH I France, he threw ^i.'lf at the feet of 1 ])(> Alexander III, then at Sens, on 23 Nov. The pope, who had given a cold reception to (crtain episcopal en- \ o\ s sent by Henry, welcomed the saint \ PI v kindly, and re- fused to accept his resignation of his see On 30 Nov., Thomas went to take up his residence at the Cistercian Abbey of Pontigny in Burgundy, though he was compelled to leave this refuge a year later, as Henry, after confiscating the archbishop's property and banishing aU the Becket kinsfolk, threatened to wreak his vengeance on the whole Cistercian Order if they continued to harbour him.

The negotiations between Henry, the pope, and the archbishop dragged on for the next four years without the position being sensibly changed. Although the saint remained firm in his resistance to the principle of the Constitutions of Clarendon, he was willing to make any concessions that could be reasonably asked of him, and on 6 Jan., 1169, when the kings of England and France were in conference at Montmirail, he threw himself at Henry's feet, but as he still refused to accept the obnoxious customs Henry repulsed him. At last in 1170 some sort of reconciliation was patched up. The question of the customs was not mentioned and Henry professed himself willing to be guided by the archbishop's council as to amends due to the See of Canterbury for the recent violation of its rights in the crowning of Henry's son by the Arch- bishop of York. On 1 Dec, 1170, St. Thomas again landed in England, and was received with every demonstration of popular enthusiasm. But trouble almost immediately occurred in connexion with (he absolution of two of the bishops, whose sentence of excommunication St. Thomas had brought with him, as well as over the restoration by the de Broc family of the archbishop's castle at Salt wood. How far Henry was directly responsible for the tragedy which soon after occurred on 29 Dec. is not quite clear. Four knights who came from France demanded the absolution of the bishops. St. Thomas would not comply. They left for a space, but came back at

Seal of the See of Canterbury Showing llie Martyrdom of St. Thorn

Vesper time with a band of armerl men. To their angry question, "Where is the traitor?" the saint boldly rephed, "Here I am, no traitor, but archbishop and priest of God." They tried to drag him from the church, but were unable, and in the end they slew him where he stood, scattering his brains on the pave- ment. His faithful companion, Edward Grim, who bore his cross, was wounded in the struggle.

A tremendous reaction of feeling followed this deed of blood. In an extraordinarily brief space of time devotion to the martyred archbishop had spread all through Europe. The pope promulgated the bull of canonization, httle more than two years after the martyrdom, 21 Feb., 1173. On 12 July, 1174, Henry II did pubUc penance, and was scourged at the archbishop's tomb. An immense number of miracles were worked, and for the rest of the Middle Ages the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury was one of the wealthiest and most famous in Europe. The mar- tyr's holy remains are bcHeved to have been destroyed in Sept., 1538, when nearly all the other shrines in England were dismantled; but the matter is by no means clear, and, although the weight of learned opinion is adverse, there are still those who believe that a skeleton found in the crypt in January, 1888, is the body of St. Thomas. The story that Henry VIII in 1.538 summoned the archbishop to stand his trial for high treason, and that when, in June, 1538, the trial had been held and the accused pronounced con- tumacious, the body was ordered to be disinterred and burnt, is probahlv :iiii>crv]>l al.

Bv far the best English liiv is .Morris, The Life of SI. Thomas Bucket (2nd ed., Loudon. 1SS5); there is a somewhat fuller work of L'HniLLlER. Saint Thomas de Cantorbiry (2 vela., Paris. 1891); the volume by Demimuid, St. Thomas Becket (Paris, 1909). in the aeries Les Saints is not abreast of modern research. There are several excellent lives by Anglicans, of which Hutton, Thomas Becket (London. 1900), and the account by Norg.ate in Diet. Nat. Biog., a. v. Thomas, known as Thomas a Beckett are probably the best. The biography by Robertson, Beckett Archbishop of Canterbury (London, 1859). is not sympathetic.

Nearly all the sourcea of the Life, as well as the books of miracles worked at the shrine, have been edited in the Rolls Series by Robertson under the title Materials for the History of Thomas Becket (7 vols., London, 1875-1883). The valuable Norse saga is edited in the same series by Magnusson, Thomas Saga Erkibyskups (2 vols., London, 1884). The chronicle of Garnieh de Pont S. Maxence, Vie de St. Thomas Martyr, has been edited by Hippeau (Paris, 1839). The miracles have ben specially studied from an agnostic standpoint by .\bbot, Th.-^nu-ts of Canterbury, his death and miracles (2 vols., London, ISOSi. Some valuable materiil tn« honn rnll,.rtod bv Radford, Thomas of London before In- i, • i,,,!, ridge, 1894). On the

relics see Morris, /i- / ' mdon, 1888) ; Thorn-

ton, Becket's Bonf< ' U ard. The Canterbury

Pilgrimages (I^ondun. l;wl . Wakxlj; lu Eng. Hist. Rev.. VI (1891), 754-56.

Herbert Thurston.

Thomas Christians, S.\int, an ancient body of Christians on tlic east and west coasts of India, claim- ing spiritual descent from the Apostle St-. Thomas. The subject will be treated under the following heads, viz.: — I. Their earlv traditions and their connexion with the Apostle St. Thomas; 11. The Apostle's tomb at Mylapur; III. Tliis upheld by the Edessan Church; IV. Fortlicir earlii\st period they possess no written but a traditional liistory; V. Record of these t traditions embodied in a MS. Statement dated 1604; VI. The Syrian merchant Thomas Cana arrives in Malabar, an important event in their history and the social benefits therefrom; VII. The arrival also of two pious brothers, church-builders; VIII. Ancient stone crosses and their inscriptions; IX. Their early prelates; X. Were these Christians infected with Nes- torianism before 1599? XI. Medieval travellers on the Thomas Christians; XII. Their two last Syrian bishops; XIII. Archbishop Menezcs and the Synod of Diamper; XIV. Their first three .lesuit bishops; XV. The Carmelite Perioil; XVI. Two Latin \'icars .\pos- tolic; XVII. Divided into three vicariates with na- tive bishops.

I. Interest in the history of these Christians arises from more than one feature. Their ancient descent at